The Wilmingtonian., 1887-04-02

with the frank verbal value of the law /
the context referring TO those occasion
when an ''opinion" is desired to be ascer
tsined upon such question.
The jones amendment acceptable as it :
in all other points, In this one unfortunatel
ewasculates and affords fruitful opportunit,
for the enemies of reform to hatch out thei
tlickery in successful attempts of mauufac
turing from their fecuud resources an over
Jones' optional voters. Thus the vote,
upon Constitutional convention would be
repeatedly drowned out or imperilled by not
gaining the constitutional lumber.
We are aware that the argument, that
very old argument, will be brought up that
those who do not interest themselves sufa
oiently publicly to form an opinion upon a
public question and then as election day
comes around use their option such as is af.
fbrded by the Jones amendment In writing
upon their ballot ''for a convention, or
against convention, that such people
are not worthy ofthe privilege of voting and
that they need not be considered. But that
argument is all wrong aud very much to
be condemned one, 1t is too wholesale and
shallow. All experience aud precedence
shows US that the "stay-at-home" vote IL
very peculiar condition in the body polite
aud very large one also. In many States
upon general questions they number quite a
large percentage of the voting population.
Now it's only from the general voting
population of an, community that an '.opiu
on," az the term is value for in the text or
the Constitution Of Delaware can be obtain
able. An opinion in the comprehensive. in.
elusive sense of the context is not opinion
when reaped from the direction of those wbo
have beeu busying themselves and agitating
upon any given question. Such an opinion
caunot rightfully be considered as the con.
seusus of the community. Aud, notwith-
standing the assertion of theorists that An
opinion can be gained by the PROCESS of in
dustrous agitation We know by experiences
that practically the election returns show
wide disparity between the total of legal
vo'eIs aud those whu have exercised the
right Of franchise at any given occasion. The
fact is that the 'stay-at- home" upset all
calculations.
1t must be remembered that the term
''btay-at-hOme voters" is in this seLse more
usually applicable to those who stay at home
throsgh whatever cause which NAV, con.
sciously or consciously, govern then, upon
special questions. In the preseut case IL
would directly apply when vote is asked
upon the question of reform. It is not that
they literally stay as home, but that 10 a po-
litical sense they might as we'll be at home
upon election day for all the opinion they
would express when option is allowed them
to write one or other of the phrases referred
to upon their election tickets. Through
whatever cause it may be, it will be found
that they have not mentioned the question
upon their ballots. This being the case
what an opportunity is afforded for the cue
mics of reform to assert that the returns OF
such election demonstrate that the people
do not want the Constitution revised
The jones amendment allows the option.
and in that fact lies the weakness and mis-.
chief of it.
The lack may be successfully combatted
by ordering that all ballots issued to voters
ON the day set apart for the determination of
this question bear either of the phrases
"fur convention" or ''against conven.
tion" and that such bsllotiDg only is at the
option OF all voters who use the franchise
that day to choose which of the two ballots
cast-and dlssllowing them to cast any bal
lot upon that day which ignores that ques-
ton.
BY this method we claim that no irdivi-
dual constitutional right will be invaded, aud
that also (Which is the main point iu view,)
An ''opinian" will be gained that day, Que
way or other, from all who vote-which is
what We understand to be the desired end.